Apple vs. Samsung - The Verdict(s) are rolling in

Colmustard

Oafley Jones wrote: »

It's the business model that's transformed them from completely ****ed to the monster they are today. Apple's ruthlessness when it comes to product lines - Sculley era Apple was doing what you suggested - is widely regarded as of the key drivers behind their success.

I agree but it's a dangerous position. What if the Iphone5 is pants and gets slammed by the market.

What if someone makes a better Ipad and undercuts apple.

That would put the company into a lot of trouble and they don't have the famous Steve Jobs launch anymore.

Why isn't there a cheaper simpler Iphone for the rest of the masses.

Oafley Jones

Colmustard wrote: »

I agree but it's a dangerous position. What if the Iphone5 is pants and gets slammed by the market.

What if someone makes a better Ipad and undercuts apple.

That would put the company into a lot of trouble and they don't have the famous Steve Jobs launch anymore.

Why isn't there a cheaper simpler Iphone for the rest of the masses.

The 4s was poo'd and wee'd on by quite a few people - including myself - when it was announced and just look at it's success. I don't think the iPhone5 has anything to fear. Going on their previous strategy I'd have expected an iPhone mini at this stage, but they clearly feel that there's no need for one. I'd imagine that they'll only launch one when they feel that there's a single device - say if the likes of the Sony Xperia U/P sold incredibly well - out there that could establish a tier below the iPhone and hurt possible sales of the main device i.e. just like I feel that we'd never see an iPad mini if it wasn't for the Kindle fire.

Colmustard

Oafley Jones wrote: »

The 4s was poo'd and wee'd on by quite a few people - including myself - when it was announced and just look at it's success. I don't think the iPhone5 has anything to fear. Going on their previous strategy I'd have expected an iPhone mini at this stage, but they clearly feel that there's no need for one. I'd imagine that they'll only launch one when they feel that there's a single device - say if the likes of the Sony Xperia U/P sold incredibly well - out there that could establish a tier below the iPhone and hurt possible sales of the main device i.e. just like I feel that we'd never see an iPad mini if it wasn't for the Kindle fire.

But I think it is one of the reasons Samsung has put it up to them. The thing about smartphones people will form a loyalty to their first. I use Android I can't see myself swapping.

I notice lately a lot of people have a cheaper version with the same operating system as my S2, its a very good cheap phone, now any of them advancing to a better smart phone will go for the same OS.

I think its a good stragedy.

BUT I do remember, everyone bought a nokia because it was so easy to use. So...............

Media999

Soon we will all be wearing glasses with phones built into them so its all ok.

Hopefully well get fricken laser beam upgrades then!!

Solair

My concern is that Apple may have launched something that could end up in "mutually assured destruction" of the whole industry.

While Apple may have patents on high-level stuff like UI designs, Nokia, Motorola, Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, Samsung etc have patents on a lot of very fundamental technologies and if they all start suing everyone, it'll be a complete disaster and everything will stagnate and products will go backwards from a technological point of view.

Media999

Solair wrote: »

My concern is that Apple may have launched something that could end up in "mutually assured destruction" of the whole industry.

While Apple may have patents on high-level stuff like UI designs, Nokia, Motorola, Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, Samsung etc have patents on a lot of very fundamental technologies and if they all start suing everyone, it'll be a complete disaster and everything will stagnate and products will go backwards from a technological point of view.

Not just IT this goes on in.

Media999

Also theres more here

Setun

An interesting and intelligent discussion in After Hours that hasn't quickly descended into an abusive merry-go-round, hurray! :rolleyes:

I used to own a Macbook Pro (I bought it in 2007) running 10.4, at the time I thought it was excellent although I can't see myself spending my hard-earned on an Apple laptop again, for numerous reasons. I think that 10.4, maybe 10.5 were the last proper 'laptop OS' that they made, since then they've been aggressively streamlining, removing control from the user, and creating some flashy iOS style interface with an extended vocabulary of gimmicky swipes and flicks for navigation. They also don't provide long term support, bullying their customers into their upgrade cycles. I've had to return to my Macbook Pro recently to do a quick job for work, and I've found that I can't update any software and is completely incompatible with the iPad, which made my work impossible to complete! In my line of work there is a strange ambivalence towards apple products - a lot of people buy them as they are told in college that they are the "best computers" for the creative industries. On the other hand, you can get other people who hate the anti-competitive behaviour of apple and are users of free/open source software exclusively. The debate is whether the individual feels that they should use what they consider to be the best tool for the job, or if their choice of software/hardware should be a political statement.

Wibbs

Setun wrote: »

I think that 10.4, maybe 10.5 were the last proper 'laptop OS' that they made, since then they've been aggressively streamlining, removing control from the user, and creating some flashy iOS style interface with an extended vocabulary of gimmicky swipes and flicks for navigation. They also don't provide long term support, bullying their customers into their upgrade cycles. I've had to return to my Macbook Pro recently to do a quick job for work, and I've found that I can't update any software and is completely incompatible with the iPad, which made my work impossible to complete!.

+1 S. I'd personally say 10.4 and 10.6 were their high water marks of OS's. Very stable, did the job well. Hell I've a 2000 powerbook g3 pismo that runs 10.4 and runs it bloody well(oh and faster than a linux install).

For me the real obvious rot started when 10.7(Lion) came out. A bit of a dogs dinner, yet the fans lapped it up. Like you say bringing in the gimmicks to try and blend the touchscreen OS onto the desktop. Daft guff like by default scroll bars being hidden until you move a good example. Completely logical on a small screen where you're designing for real screen real estate, but completely stupid on a desktop. Then the gimmicky lets make the address book look like a book and all that shíte. Their GUI design used to be the one to beat, but now it looks like they're running low on ideas. Locking you into their cloud ballsology another issue and early attempts to lock you into apps they consider OK.

Professey Chin

Wibbs wrote: »

+1 S. I'd personally say 10.4 and 10.6 were their high water marks of OS's. Very stable, did the job well. Hell I've a 2000 powerbook g3 pismo that runs 10.4 and runs it bloody well(oh and faster than a linux install).

For me the real obvious rot started when 10.7(Lion) came out. A bit of a dogs dinner, yet the fans lapped it up. Like you say bringing in the gimmicks to try and blend the touchscreen OS onto the desktop. Daft guff like by default scroll bars being hidden until you move a good example. Completely logical on a small screen where you're designing for real screen real estate, but completely stupid on a desktop. Then the gimmicky lets make the address book look like a book and all that shíte. Their GUI design used to be the one to beat, but now it looks like they're running low on ideas. Locking you into their cloud ballsology another issue and early attempts to lock you into apps they consider OK.

And that looks absolutely horrible anyway.
I really dont like this bringing touch elements into desktop OSs and MS are at the same with windows 8. I have a precise mouse so I dont need big clunky icons and lots of wasted space. And I dont need crap running as full screen apps when I just want a couple of windows open!!

basillarkin

Brad is only 2 years younger than George

Tea_Bag wrote: »

I don't understand this legal battle. apple and Samsung don't compete in the same market. I've never met a single 'apple consumer' that was in the market for a Tablet and went "hmm, that Samsung 10.1 kinda looks like the iPad, I think I'll buy it instead"

likewise, if you've discovered Android, there's no way in hell you'd buy apple, doesn't matter if they're the mirror image of each other. you buy what you want for the OS.

but apple has decided that somehow Samsung is stealing their consumers, and decided to sue their BIGGEST supplier. what ever happened to the company that stays ahead of the competition wins? Apple always claims to be about innovation, but frankly, they haven't done any in a very long time. they should be proud everyone wants to look like them, it means they're doing everything right.

maybe George Clooney should sue Brad Pitt for being a young good looking Hollywood version of him?

Biggins

Wibbs wrote: »

...let's go back to 1983 shall we? Never mind the late 80's Apple thinktank voice recognition apple phone.

Thanks for mentioning that but you brought up the topic of the smartphone - not the voice recognition apple phone.
Why your trying now to throw that in when its a different phone and one separate from the previous one you brought up, is best known to yourself so far.

For all Apple's spin, double-standards and lies (Yes, including the German court ones), they are accusing others of the very thing that they have done themselves - but when their sales are lower in percent than Android, no wonder they get get bitchy and use any means possible to kill of competition.

Its now typical of their tactics.
Said it before and I'll say it again, "Apple, I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire!"
They are a thug, lying, double-standard company.
They don't invent - they renovate and then when they can't do that, they take others ideas - again!

Is there something hypocritical here? That it's okay for Apple to copy -- in Jobs' words steal -- but unacceptable for others to do the same or invent something new learned from Apple innovations?

http://betanews.com/2011/09/24/apple-patent-lawsuits-are-hypocritical/

And then there is the story of Greg Hughes, a third-year computer science student who contacted Apple in May 2010 about an iPhone app he created; a wireless sync system that would allow your phone to sync with iTunes wirelessly. Apple rejected the idea claiming it was a security risk, so Hughes has been selling his app for the last year on Cydia, an online store for "jailbroken" phones.

When Apple recently launched iOS5, WIFI Sync was one of the big selling points that Apple has pimped the hell out of.

Greg Hughes was shocked and upset with the news about the Sync on iOS5. "I'd been selling my app with that name and icon for a year. Apple knew about it as I'd submitted it to them, so it was surprising to see that they had pinched it for iOS 5.” Greg Hughes is getting legal advice on the issue and plans to follow this up. "At the end of the day you have to stand up and defend your work," he said.

From hardware to software, Apple have been very outspoken about other companies stealing their ideas, yet it appears that Apple may not be entirely innocent themselves.

http://www.succeed2k.com/technology/did-apple-steal-technology.html

Kaysen Stale Kilt

Kaysen Stale Kilt wrote: »

Would you ever clear off with that absolute nonsense. Apple make extremely good products but some people just think its "cool" to say otherwise. They wouldnt be the most valuable company in the world if their products were not very very good.

iPhones : As phones they are sh!t , as a handheld games console its sh!t with a **** selection of games. It can connec to the internet but cant display websites using flash or flash games. Youtube is blocked to stop you from looking at music videos. So thats sh!t It plays Mp3s , nothing special as you can get Microwaves that play MP3's . OVERPRICED

IPAD 1 , not bad but what does it do ?? Its a touch screen pad with access to the internet cant display websites that have flash games like the iphone, youtube is blocked , it can play really bad games badly like the iphone. Its a larger iphone without the phone.

IPAD 2 : Its an IPAD with a camera. You too, can now look like a plonker whist trying to take a picture with this oversized Camera.Same problems as above. Does everything it has to do, Badly. Way Overpriced.

Lets face it, Apple products are the Kim Kardashian of the electronics world. They look good, everybody has had a go and at the end of they day you can help but realize it doesn't actually do anything.

indough

Seaneh wrote: »

Neither of which are apple tech and both of which are ignored by every one else because they are either no better than other tech available or offer far less value for money.

But when it comes to apple, let's be honest, it's more about the look and the desire to be "different" than practicality, hence idiocy like unibody laptops (no performance benefit, several times more expensive than a cast body, actual limitation on performance, etc) and using stupid tech like firewire and now thunderbolt.

firewire was developed by apple

at the time it was indispensable in the world of digital video editing (also used in a lot of audio applications fwiw). thunderbolt is going to be most relevant for the same type of professional and prosumer applications (it is already implemented in the blackmagic cinema camera for example, which shoots in raw and would seem to take a lifetime to transfer anything otherwise). they may not have been all that useful to the average consumer but are/were far from stupid tech and yet another example of apple knowing their target demographic and implementing technology likewise (apple may not have developed thunderbolt but once again they are adopting early).

arguably firewire could probably be credited with helping drive forward the speed of usb too.

to provide a further and perhaps more relevant (to this thread) example of apple knowing their market, your average consumer doesn't give a flying fiddlers **** whether their handheld device can load some obscure little app that they programmed themselves, or whether they are forced to use an apple program to load music onto their device. what they are looking for is something that allows them to make phone calls, listen to music and maybe play the odd crappy game every so often. at the very worst they are going to be niggling little problems but of course in internet discussion they get blown out of all proportion as if they are crimes against humanity or something.

when all is said and done samsung can now go away and design their own phone without copying apples this time, its not as though this is day zero and there will be forced iphones for all from now on.

Biggins

indough wrote: »

firewire was developed by apple

Who invented Firewire?

There are many people and organizations that worked together to "invent" Firewire. (See the brief history below.) The primary people (besides me) include:

Roger Van Brunt (Apple) and Florin Oprescu (Apple), who did most of the work on the original transceivers. Which indirectly led to National Semiconductor's creation of the industry standard "LVDS" (low voltage differential signalling) interface in the early '90s. Roger is currently at RF Microdevices and Florin is at Linear Technology.

Florin Oprescu and William Duckwall, who invented the arbitration and initialization protocol used in 1394 ... Bill further enhanced the protocol which resulted in the major technical enhancements in 1394a. Bill is currently working with Roger at RF Microdevices.

David James, who, along with me, invented the isochronous access method that allows Firewire to simultaneously transfer streaming data (audio and video) along with low-latency asynchronous data (disk data, IP networking, etc). David was also the one that pushed to allow Firewire to act like a memory bus, which was the key innovation that allows Firewire disks to be their own DMA controllers .. something that the rest of the world is finally catching up to with something called "RDMA" (remote DMA) used in the iSCSI universe. David is currently an independent consultant.

Paul Walker and others at ST Microelectronics invented the data-strobe encoding system used in 1394 and 1394a. This allows roughly twice the data transfer speed over traditional clock-and-data interfaces.

Jerry Hauck and David LaFollette (both at Intel when they did this) invented the "BOSS" protocol used in 1394b and 1394c to allow bus arbitration to proceed in parallel with data transfer. David Wooten and I enhanced this a bit to make it run at optimal speed regardless of network topology.

Alistair Coles and others at HP Labs (Bristol, UK) invented the encoding methodology that allows 1394b to run so fast and still meet FCC class B emissions specs.

http://www.johasteener.com/what-is-firewire.html#Who_invented_Firewire


I also suggest you watch this video below at the three minute section:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0

Gummy Panda

I prefer my One X. I just find the apps on android cooler

indough

Biggins wrote: »

http://www.johasteener.com/what-is-firewire.html#Who_invented_Firewire


I also suggest you watch this video below at the three minute section:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFeC25BM9E0

your link confirms that apple developed firewire

ScumLord

I'm not in love with either company, I'm turned off Apple products completely, bar the build quality of their stuff I don't like anything else about the way the company does business. They're trying to monopolise the PC business and it just goes against the grain of everything I like about the universal nature of the PC. While it could be argued Microsoft tried to do the same thing the fact is Microsoft works in so many different industries making their software compatible with so much different hardware and software it encourages innovation and loads of different industries can get a cut of the technology pie.

The reason I don't like Samsung is because I owned a samsung omnia running windows phone 6. That phone was a disaster it really felt like the phone was alive and trying to make my life a living hell.

PogMoThoin

indough wrote: »

your link confirms that apple developed firewire

They amongst many other companies contributed to the development of Firewire, they did not develop it

indough

PogMoThoin wrote: »

They amongst many other companies contributed to the development of Firewire, they did not develop it

which by definition means they developed it

Biggins

indough wrote: »

your link confirms that apple developed firewire

Correct, thats my point.
They helped develop it along with others - they didn't actually invent it.
In fact there was many more that worked on "Firewire" than just Apple. They weren't leading the charge, they were just inputting their small ratio efforts.
They then used the developments of it and integrated their version into their devices.

Professey Chin

ScumLord wrote: »

The reason I don't like Samsung is because I owned a samsung omnia running windows phone 6. That phone was a disaster it really felt like the phone was alive and trying to make my life a living hell.

Heres your problem :pac:

anncoates

http://img2.joyreactor.com/pics/post/apple-teapot-innovation-206642.jpeg

- not sent from an iPhone

art davidson

Wibbs wrote: »

Eh... he's dead?

hence 'would love' to see.

indough

Biggins wrote: »

Correct, thats my point.
They helped develop it along with others - they didn't actually invent it.
In fact there was many more that worked on "Firewire" than just Apple. They weren't leading the charge, they were just inputting their small ratio efforts.

so essentially you are arguing with yourself given that neither mine nor the post i quoted ever mention apple and apple alone inventing the technology.

id be interested to know how you came to the conclusion that they put little effort into the development of it though. again, in your own link it says that apple employees "did most of the work on the original transceivers". assuming that was (extremely doubtfully) the extent of their involvement it would still amount to more than "small ratio efforts". im not even 100% on what that means but rant on as per

Biggins

indough wrote: »

so essentially you are arguing with yourself given that neither mine nor the post i quoted ever mention apple and apple alone inventing the technology.

id be interested to know how you came to the conclusion that they put little effort into the development of it though. again, in your own link it says that apple employees "did most of the work on the original transceivers". assuming that was (extremely doubtfully) the extent of their involvement it would still amount to more than "small ratio efforts". im not even 100% on what that means but rant on as per

You previously posted "Apple developed Firewire" - that imposes (to me anyway if I knew nothing about the matter) that Apple were sole developers.

I made your statement more accurate - they HELPED along with others. They didn't do it on their own as your previous statement might appear to portray (or did you conveniently forget to mention all the majority others who also developed it?)

id be interested to know how you came to the conclusion that they put little effort into the development of it though.

Again, they were one of many. Their original input was in one area of the matter. There was far more involved than just them.

redandwhite

Apple every time.

TeddyTedson

I've been using a Mac for about 6 years now and had two iphones. But apples cash hungry attitude has pissed me off enough and they've lacked innovation for quite a while.
I won't be buying another apple product for the foreseeable future.
They're dumbing down an entire industry, meanwhile gaining a monopoly.

Biggins

TeddyTedson wrote: »

I've been using a Mac for about 6 years now and had two iphones. But apples cash hungry attitude has pissed me off enough and they've lacked innovation for quite a while.
I won't be buying another apple product for the foreseeable future.
They're dumbing down an entire industry, meanwhile gaining a monopoly.

Thats my point partly.

What Apple in products they have made, they have being doing well. They have!
They take something, change it, tweak it and make it work better - and fair play to them for that.

However they are also now attempting to kill off others for doing the very thing they have being doing prior to they releasing their own stuff.
Its not helping the whole industry and I agree, they are trying to bring about a monopoly via a court room alone.

Apple has not just become about producing items made from the ideas of others - they have become about trying to kill off the competition in bullying, lying tactics or any other method.
This is not good for the I.T. industry.

Scioch

For someone who doesnt have that much knowledge on this thing and isnt a fanboy or hater (as it were) its hard to know whats what. On one side I see a perfectly valid argument that Apple although now a bit dodgy have been a driving force in the industry. On the other side there a perfectly valid argument that Apple was one of many who contributed to that and cannot be held aloft as the sole driving force in the industry.

Its hard to stomach the "Apple did it all" brigade and the "Apple are thieves brigade". All these things are being thrown out as trophies for Apple when they were one of many companies who developed the stuff, or nooses to hang them with as they were not alone in the development. So you get "Apple did it all" contrasted with "Apple robbed it all". No matter how its phrased or how people weasel out of it those are the arguments essentially being made.

Apple as a company has been amazingly good for the industry but its clear they have built on the work of others as others have built on their work. But now they are trying to deprive other companies of that ability, the same ability that has gotten the industry to where it is. So they essentially helped build this industry and now they want to lock it down so as not to lose market share. Thats the issue here, and whatever way you look at it its not good. Not good for other companies, not good for the industry and not good for the consumer.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

iPhones : As phones they are sh!t , as a handheld games console its sh!t with a **** selection of games. It can connec to the internet but cant display websites using flash or flash games. Youtube is blocked to stop you from looking at music videos. So thats sh!t It plays Mp3s , nothing special as you can get Microwaves that play MP3's . OVERPRICED

I think the they are very good as actual phones and I don't play games on the phone nor did I buy it for that so I cant comment on games.

I can't remember the lack of flash having any effect on me, most sites that use flash have either an app (which I prefer than actually using the website) or have a separate site for iPhones. YouTube is not blocked, there is a youtube app installed on the phone from factory for fecks sake, I'm always watching youtube vids on the phone. Most new videos are on the Vevo app but rather than youtube but what difference does that make.

The argument your using would be just as applicable to android phones if you leave out flash which makes no difference as its so easy to work around.

Biggins

Scioch wrote: »

...Apple as a company has been amazingly good for the industry but its clear they have built on the work of others as others have built on their work. But now they are trying to deprive other companies of that ability, the same ability that has gotten the industry to where it is. So they essentially helped build this industry and now they want to lock it down so as not to lose market share. Thats the issue here, and whatever way you look at it its not good. Not good for other companies, not good for the industry and not good for the consumer.

Better summed up than I have done.

Wibbs

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

And that looks absolutely horrible anyway.
I really dont like this bringing touch elements into desktop OSs and MS are at the same with windows 8.

I'd blame Apple for influencing that guff on Windows 8 myself. It's been my impression since Vista that MS have been Appling up their OS, to their detriment I might add.

I loved when MS brought out their own phone OS. Radically different in look and feel to apple and it's various clones. If Google had done similar I;d have had a lot more respect for them. That said in another way I prefer that they went the "clone" route they did, as it forces everyone to try and beat each other in features. If we had three very different phone OS's we'd likely not see that to nearly the same extent. It also give the consumer who prefers the general "apple" look and feel an alternative. Indeed a suite of alternatives(though that can bring it's own issues. sometimes there can be too many choices) and cheaper ones at that.

Biggins wrote: »

Thanks for mentioning that but you brought up the topic of the smartphone - not the voice recognition apple phone.
Why your trying now to throw that in when its a different phone and one separate from the previous one you brought up, is best known to yourself so far.

Jeez Biggins you really hate being challenged when you're wrong, or vaguely right in support of a blinkered stance. And you've been both on a few occasions on the thread.

Its now typical of their tactics.
Said it before and I'll say it again, "Apple, I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire!"
They are a thug, lying, double-standard company.
They don't invent - they renovate and then when they can't do that, they take others ideas - again!

Yea that's clearly an objective stance to kick off debate from.

They don't invent/innovate?

OK short list off the top of my head of stuff we all take for granted today that Apple either invented internally or took a risk to develop and implement;
Overlapping windows(Smalltalk didn't have this)
Drop down menus
Trash/recycle bin
Desktop metaphor
Control panels
Dual forked file system
Long file names(remember when windows limited you? Even limited the characters you could use)
Different typestyles/fonts and made a HUGE impact on how we published material. I suspect in a 1000 years time people will note that desktop publishing had nearly the same impact as movable type printing and that was damn near the sole preserve of apple until very recently
Following from that Font management, access to different languages and Truetype.
Plug and play printing
Plug and play all over the shop.
Networking for non geeks(appletalk)
Consistent icons to label ports
Chose the 3.5 inch floppy out of competing standards for the first mac and that became the standard.
Aliases/shortcuts
Postscript laserprinters
Had WYSIWG years before the IBM/PC mainstream
Multimedia computers outa the box.

That's just for starters and before the mid 90's BTW and doesn't include industrial design solutions IE laptop design that became the industry standard.

They have indeed played silly buggers and like the rest ripped off/peeked over the shoulders of others and their innovations have most certainly tailed off in the last 5 years, but to suggest they don't invent/innovate is eye swivellingly daft, blinkered and ignorant of IT history. There was a joke going around Microsoft back in the day when they referred to Apple as their southern R&D centre. For good reason.

Scioch wrote:

Apple as a company has been amazingly good for the industry but its clear they have built on the work of others as others have built on their work. But now they are trying to deprive other companies of that ability, the same ability that has gotten the industry to where it is. So they essentially helped build this industry and now they want to lock it down so as not to lose market share. Thats the issue here, and whatever way you look at it its not good. Not good for other companies, not good for the industry and not good for the consumer.

Oh I most certainly agree. I disliked when MS were pulling this guff and prefered apple's different environment because of that. I equally still dislike intel's ballsology in this area and again preferred apple when they were using motorola chips. Some very nice tech in the G series of chips at the time. The fact the desktops and the laptops were running essentially the same chips for a start. Not the case with intel PC's at the time.

IMHO the Apple I respected(past tense) was the apple as the innovative small guys in the market. Hey maybe if google do screw them it might actually be better for apple and the rest of us. Make no mistake google are right dodgy bastards too, hiding in plain view behind the we're open y'know guff. At least apple and MS before them are obvious.

Biggins

Again Wibbs with your opinion, we could debate back and forth over a number of stuff you listed (and it would get neither of us anywhere).

At the end of the day, I praise Apple for their huge contribution to the I.T. industry previously - but now it seems they are full of double standards, about restricting user rights and restricting competition.

Who is the real winner here?
Apple.

It sure is not the I.T. industry or by knock-on effect, the consumer.

Skylinehead

By the way, all those saying Apple created Thunderbolt: wrong. Intel created it, Apple only promoted it. And I'm not sure it's even going to make it into mainstream.

Overheal

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Sorry, got to pull you on this. No phone got Honeycomb, it was a tablet only version of android. All of the blame for the lack of upgrades on Android lies with the phone manufacturers themselves, not Google. New versions of Android don't require better faster hardware, new versions have the same hardware requirements, ICS will run just as well on the same hardware as GB, Jellybean runs better on the same hardware as ICS, it's up to the hardware manufacturers to put some time into developing it and release it as an upgrade. Most of them use it as an excuse to stop supporting older hardware.

sorry, i should retrace/retract that statement a little, this would have been mid march. ICS was out on my iconia A200 (killed its performance) and of the phones i was comparing, I think one or two might have had ICS at that point. At that point in your shopping experience though it extends to other things, like "this has the OS I want, but it's an ugly as **** phone that wont fit in my pocket etc". Ironically though if Sprint carried the Note I probably wouldve signed up for it, just for the adventure of having a PDA-sized phone.

As for dropping support for older devices, thats basically my point. The Iconia A500 got ICS months after the newer A200, not because it would have been hard to do, but it would have hurt A200 sales. While this also holds true for Apple (Siri could have run on the iPhone 4 according to many critics while Apple alleged that adding it in would have killed performance on the original Chip, and it similarly doesn't appear as Voice Dictation on the iPad 2 either which used the same chip) but they've been pretty good about it in general with iOS, I can't speak with credibility on OSX though. Not my area.

srsly78 wrote: »

You can't put the latest iOs on older iphones either (without similar jailbreak malarkey that will just cause grief). Similarly you can't run windows 7 on a commodore 64

Not into Generation 1 and 2 (The iPhone 3G) phones. These would be the oldest 2 phones, released in 2007 and 2008. These are also discontinued. The 3GS is still in manufacture.

3GS, 4 and 4S can support iOS 5. All versions of iPad support it, as well as the 3rd and 4th gen iPod Touch. Important to note, iOS 6 will still support the 3GS and the 4th Gen iPod Touch while it will drop support for the original iPad and the 3rd gen iPod Touch.

3GS was released in 2009, as we're talking about phones. What a damn trooper: if you bought this in 2009, your software will be current on it up to the Fall of 2013. At least. But practically, they will then drop it's support.

Android meanwhile hasn't really been able to claim too often that, say, the phone you bought 2 years ago is now getting Jellybean, either. Honest question, does a Galaxy S support it? an SII? They'll at the very least have to get better about it.

Colmustard wrote: »

I agree but it's a dangerous position. What if the Iphone5 is pants and gets slammed by the market.

What if someone makes a better Ipad and undercuts apple.

That would put the company into a lot of trouble and they don't have the famous Steve Jobs launch anymore.

iPhone 4 survived "Antennagate". The New iPad survived criticism that it couldn't be charged and ran too hot. I think they will be just fine. They're big boys that can stand it if they have a flop, but they wont have a flop, they'll have a hiccup here and there. And as someone else pointed out the 4S was pood on 2 because people were upset about how identical it looked to the 4 and how they didn't call it the 5. Everybody and their grandmother was calling it the 5. Thennnn we had "stickergate" - the practice of trolls putting an "S" sticker on their iphone 4's

People have made tablets that undercut Apple but they honestly aren't the droids of yet. [Must. Not. Get. Into. Rant. About. Asus *EDIT* : f*ck it. WHAT THE HELL ASUS? You're on your 4TH GENERATION TABLET IN A YEAR. They all have ****ing keyboards and not of the keyboards ****ing work properly with one another, so if you wanted to keep upgrading you need to keep buying new keyboards and it's the same ****ing keyboard more or less with the same buttons and the same battery and the same ports. UGH. F*CK YOU. I used to like ASUS. They need to stick to motherboards, or have a reality check. One or the other. Don't get me wrong it's ****ing great they always have the latest Tegra 3 Gorilla Glass whateverthe**** but there is something to be said for waiting a few months to come out with something that really smokes versus something you rushed out there with the latest Ghz in it just to have the thing with the latest Ghz in it. Samsung doesn't have a Tegra 3 out, and they are still kicking ass.]

The droids have good contenders in the 10" space but where the market is beating apple is in the 7" space. Until apple releases a fabled iPad Mini (and in my opinion, an iPad Pro, to compete with Windows 8 devices) All they really have cornered is the middle price band of $400-700. $700+ you can pretty much buy a Windows Tablet (even now) with a real working pen. Less than 400 you're typically looking at 7" tabs and of those Amazon dove in first and absorbed most of the market, the shower of bastards, and now the best 7 tab I know of is the Galaxy 2 Tab 7, and good for it, it's a nice little kit.

Why isn't there a cheaper simpler Iphone for the rest of the masses.

There is. It's the iPhone 3GS. It still exists. You can get it for free with any phone contract.

The 4 meanwhile is regularly selling for $50 with any new contract. When the 5 comes out, expect the 3GS to disappear and the 4 to be the new "free" iPhone, while the 4S will retail for about $50-100 with a contract, and the new phone about $200-300.

Remember, Nokia sparked off the cellphone market 10 years ago with the 3210. We all ****ing remember it, and we remember it fondly. They didn't need 50 other devices to be successful. Yes they improved on it, and competitors came in, but **** them, they weren't the 3210, or the 3310. In saying that though I had the 3650, the one with the round keypad. I won it on a coke label. That phone was cool, until I water damaged it. Still texted, the screen just went haywire if you were pressing buttons.

srsly78

The cellphone market was "sparked off" in 2002? What age are you? :pac:

Overheal

srsly78 wrote: »

The cellphone market was "sparked off" in 2002? What age are you? :pac:

25.

Not saying cellphones havent been around for decades, but the early 2000s is when the cellphone became a mainstream commodity, so much so that even children started carrying them.

I do remember the cellphone my mom had back in '92 though. It was one of the Motorola "brick" phones. The battery was enormous, I remember the charger she had for it in the kitchen. She was in Real Estate though, it had business application. Not the tiny little thing you carry in your pocket in case you want to talk to your friend Mary for the next 4 hours.

mathstalk

Overheal wrote: »

if you look at other things like the Samsung Series 9 laptops, they're basically windows macbooks. That's all they are. Same trackpad, same lot-of-other-things.

I have to admit, that's probably one of the reasons I went for my Samsung laptop. I feel so shallow right now.

VEN

ah who cares, i don't use an intel os or a dodgy windows os nor have i ever in almost 20 years.

all the talk knocking down apple, what they did and didn't invent. most of you probably never even seen one pre-ipod.

flash is dead, end of debate on flash.

Biggins

VEN wrote: »

...most of you probably never even seen one pre-ipod.

I owned a number of Creative Lab (Sound Blaster card makers - they set the industrial stand for some time) portable music players.
The updated ones which still can be found here.

PogMoThoin

Biggins wrote: »

I owned a number of Creative Lab (Sound Blaster card makers - they set the industrial stand for some time) portable music players.
The updated ones which still can be found here.

They also supported many more formats and allowed drag and drop of mp3's for half the price per GB.

BTW, Creative are with Apple on my blacklist for nasty practices

ScumLord

Wibbs wrote: »

They don't invent/innovate?

OK short list off the top of my head of stuff we all take for granted today that Apple either invented internally or took a risk to develop and implement;
Overlapping windows(Smalltalk didn't have this)
Drop down menus
Trash/recycle bin
Desktop metaphor
Control panels
Dual forked file system
Long file names(remember when windows limited you? Even limited the characters you could use)
Different typestyles/fonts and made a HUGE impact on how we published material. I suspect in a 1000 years time people will note that desktop publishing had nearly the same impact as movable type printing and that was damn near the sole preserve of apple until very recently
Following from that Font management, access to different languages and Truetype.
Plug and play printing
Plug and play all over the shop.
Networking for non geeks(appletalk)
Consistent icons to label ports
Chose the 3.5 inch floppy out of competing standards for the first mac and that became the standard.
Aliases/shortcuts
Postscript laserprinters
Had WYSIWG years before the IBM/PC mainstream
Multimedia computers outa the box.

To be fair much of those aren't great innovations or inventions but more of consumer lead upgrades. Most of those look like features Apple may have got to release first rather than something coming way out of left field.

Overheal

Biggins wrote: »

I owned a number of Creative Lab (Sound Blaster card makers - they set the industrial stand for some time) portable music players.
The updated ones which still can be found here.

I had a MuVo^2. First one was a lemon, and then I dropped the other one. Windows Media Player compatibility was nice though. On the whole though as much as I hate iTunes it's nice that I don't have to interface with it very often, maybe a couple of times a year.

After MuVo I went and bought a Sandisk Sansa (annoying. Cheap. worked ) and then after that sat in my dresser unused for a couple years I bought the 4th gen iPod Touch last summer, mainly because of the bluetooth support.

Zascar

I just found this really excellent TED video called "Everything is a Remix" - very apt with this case, I highly recommend you watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd-dqUuvLk4

It's a quick summary of the 4 part series here: http://www.everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/ - it's really good I'm just watching it now...

Wibbs

ScumLord wrote: »

To be fair much of those aren't great innovations or inventions but more of consumer lead upgrades.

Consumer lead upgrades? Comsumers had feck all to do with that stuff. Don't confuse the markeshing apple of today with the genuinely innovative apple of the past(for start their R&D dept was much larger). At that stage of IT history consumers barely knew what they wanted. Cast your mind back to a time in the mid 1980's where the C: prompt ruled. That list of stuff from apple wasn't just left field it was beyond what most people thought computers were about. This is only a couple of years after the Sinclair spectrum. It was the mid 90's before even some of that was available in the general PC world and even then was inelegant and clunky by comparison. This was stuff they were dreaming up in house too. Sometime subtle things other times pretty big moves forward. And BTW Stevie baby had not that big an input with this stuff, as he left/was kicked out pretty early on. Their forays into the future laptop design was long after he left. Look at some of the stuff their boffins were looking into in 1995(from 30' on)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPS1DMlzz0M

Some of their ideas like the Newton and the Newton OS were released too soon(and daftly expensive) though had some very clever ideas and actually worked at the end. The final Newton and OS actually did recognise and transcribe writing on the screen, but by that stage it's time had passed. As a company throughout their history they certainly brought to market a helluva lot of gamechanging stuff for the world of computing for non geeks. That has radically slowed in the last 5 years with the odd burp, but from say 85 to 2000 they were well ahead of most in the field.

Actually I reckon that's part of why some were anti Apple back in the day. This is before the Apple fashion PR iBullshít that took over more recently. I noticed among techie mates back in the day a near disgust that IT gear should be "easy to use". They preferred the tinkering with the machine itself. A thousand options they could fiddle with(but usually only set the once)That alone was a means to an end for them, rather than another tool anyone could use with a lot less training and support staff in the background to actually do stuff. Studies in the 90's showed that you required significantly less IT staff to support macs in an environment(IIRC it was Disney who went Mac back then for this reason. Dearer to buy, cheaper to run over time). It was one reason beyond cost per unit that IT staff tended to poo poo Apple macs back in the day. Turkeys won't vote for Xmas.

At least some of that is still around today. The "overpriced toys" notion, with a touch of reverse techie and actual snobbery. The overpriced tag was way more applicable back then. They were at least double the price per unit of PCs in a lot of cases.

TeddyTedson

Zascar wrote: »

I just found this really excellent TED video called "Everything is a Remix" - very apt with this case, I highly recommend you watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd-dqUuvLk4

It's a quick summary of the 4 part series here: http://www.everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/ - it's really good I'm just watching it now...

I'd thank this twice if I could. Great video. That man knows.

Overheal

Aaaand it's Monday.

One Juror over the weekend has been making quite a few comments, like saying they pretty much knew Samsung was going to be at fault by Day One because of the email evidence. Plus, there are a lot of questions being raised about the paperwork filed by the Jury: for instance, according to Gizmodo they awarded monies for the Samsung Galaxy 10.1 Tab LTE even though it was not found to be infringing on any patents, as an example. Whether all the weirdness will be enough to throw out the verdict, or simply have it amended, is unclear. Samsung will certainly be soaking all this information up and bringing it to appeals though.

Meanwhile Apple already presented the list of devices they want pulled from the market: all of them are Phones. They include the Charge, The Galaxy S and many S2 variants.

Another thing Diaz points out, and I mentioned it in my OP with the Tab 2 Front Speaker, is that the win is actually a good thing for innovation. He points out Microsoft knew better than to flirt with a patent war, and so their new Surface tablets are significant improvements over the current tablet generation (say what you will about "Metro"). But again, knowing that this patent war was coming for a year now, it's seen other manufacturers including samsung come out with things that are far less "standard" - that standard being iPhone-ish. Things like the Note phone, or the Tab 2 with the front speakers. ASUS with it's keyboard docks (but **** them). Even Android UI improvements, like multitasking, are now becoming far stronger. The new Galaxy Note Tab even uses windowed applications.

I'm too young to remember if they had these wars back in the 90s over the now standard concept of a laptop, with a trackpad and wrist rest area, etc. - but I'm sure as hell that they did. There's so much sameness in laptops now that it's a standard. Tablets will eventually get there, but not before some more wild-eyed experimenting.

Professey Chin

A lot of the Jury stuff coming out is really weird. Talking about the foreman (who seems to be a patent troll) carrying a lot of influence in the jury because he knows the patent game and other jurors went along with him. Plus awarding money for things that didnt infringe. Awarding infringement claims over things that arent on the phones. And a lot of patent lawers have said to even read & understand the jury instructions would have taken as long as their entire deliberation.

Overheal

I'd be curious to know if Jurors were asked during screening if they held any Patents. They were surely asked a lot of other things.